vaultofthearchonfandomcom-20200214-history
136746-a-philosophical-means-to-objectively-judge-the-f2p-launch-of-wildstar
Content ---- ---- You falsely equate revenue with game quality / enjoyment, or anything people actually consider "successful" in a game. Protip: Don't start off a philosophical treatise on objective determinations with bald-faced logical fallacy. Edited October 4, 2015 by Nazryn | |} ---- In fact I state the opposite insisting the games quality / enjoyment have nothing to do with the games success. You provide no means to measure quality and no means to measure enjoyment then assert they are factors in the game success you also imply the importance of things that people consider "successful" as an aside why the quotes? without stating what they are? What you or anyone else consider successful is purely subjective so again I invite you to prove me wrong. | |} ---- You've proven yourself wrong. I quote: "What you or anyone else consider successful is purely subjective " Your arbitrary substitution of "revenue" for "success" doesn't overcome the subjective nature of what people consider successful. It simply imposes YOUR definition of success as if it is the "correct" or "only" reasonable definition. Edited October 4, 2015 by Nazryn | |} ---- This. He's pretty much spot on with this. I can't see how you can argue with this as a premise. | |} ---- 1. Not Enough revenue therefor the game closes. What you feel in the deepest core of your being wont change that fact. 2. Enough revenue therefor the game continues. What you feel in the deepest core of your being wont change that fact. Cant make it any simpler than that. Edited October 4, 2015 by GTDavis | |} ---- 1.) that's not true. Example Warhammer online. A great game, Mythic tanked and took it down with it. The game is now hosted on private servers because people love it and consider it "successful". 2.) also not the same as being "successful" to many people. I can think of many terrible games that continue to make money regardless of quality. I can't make it any simpler than this either. Your premise relies on false assumptions. | |} ---- 1. False equivalence fallacy in action. 2. Subjective feels talk, capped off with more false equivalence fallacy. | |} ---- ---- 1) that people value a game enough to continue it beyond it's commercial lifetime is clear evidence that they consider it a successful game, and is not false equivalence 2) You yourself admit that success is subjective (which it is). Why you suddenly ignore this is beyond me. Must be your "subjective feels" driving you to push a dead argument. Edited October 4, 2015 by Nazryn | |} ---- ---- ---- Counter augment incoming? please I want to know where I'm wrong so I can improve my arguments. | |} ---- Your argument is invalid and unnecessary because it achieves nothing. I'd like to know what you hope to gain other than attempting to sound intelligent or philisophical. Also, your writing style reminds me of the HK droids in TOR. | |} ---- Thank you, your right we cannot judge the game yet. Ive merely outlined my reasoning process as to why we cannot yet cast a verdict. | |} ---- So insults then? Come on. Its invalid because you say so? by that logic I think its true so it must be. | |} ---- That isn't an ad hominem statement. It's an observation, I agree, you are attempting to inflate your ethos with contrived diction. I notice you ignored my last set of comments on the invalidity of your statements, any particular reason why? Wildstar is both entertainment, AND (more importantly in my opinion) it is art in the truest sense of the word. Success of art is inherently and necessarily subjective, ergo no true objective metric exists for it. QED Edited October 4, 2015 by Nazryn | |} ---- The title of the thread is "...judge the f2p launch of wildstar" not "...judge wildstar". The F2P Launch of Wildstar was a disaster based on the following evidence: 1) Server problems - crashes, continual rebooting needed, server capacity problems 2) Login issues - inability to login, login loops 3) Lag issues - lots of that 4) Loading loop issues As for the game itself - it's fun once you get past all that. It is nothing amazing or genre pushing. Historically speaking, the game launched on the P2P model and suffered the fate of many MMO games, drop in player base, server merges and then F2P or probably shut down. That in itself could be a means to judge the game. Good enough to be F2P but not B2P with a subscription. Fun just not innovative and does not distinguish itself from the rest of the market. Fun enough to be F2P. | |} ---- So if it was less fun, we should have to pay for it? Is that what you're saying? | |} ---- No, but, could you show me how to came to that conclusion based on what I said. | |} ---- Well then, we're in luck. We have a fortune teller outside the game spamming their services. ;) I agree, though. It's silly to try to think one can predict the success of a game based on how well or badly the F2P launch goes. In the long run, something can have a horrible launch and do well, or have an absolutely splendid launch and do horribly. Edited October 4, 2015 by MadBlue | |} ---- ---- ---- ----